8.Lincoln-DouglasDebates(1858)

The Lincoln-Douglas debates were a series of seven debates between Abraham Lincoln, aRepublican,andStephenA.Douglas,aDemocrat,heldduringthesummerandfallof1858 inIllinois.TheywerecandidatesintheIllinoisraceforU.S.Senator.LincolnandDouglashadbeendebatingeachotherformorethantwentyyearsbeforetheirfamouscontestfortheUSSenatein1858.Theywerelongtimerivalswithcontrastingstylesandsharpdifferencesinphilosophy.Douglas sawno reasonwhy thenation couldnot goonhalf-slave andhalf-free, and felt theDred Scott decision had put the slavery issue to rest. Lincoln disagreed andwas against theDred-Scottdecision,believingthatslaverywasamoralissue.Lincolnlosttheelection,butthedebateswerewidelyreported,andhelpedmakeLincolnanationalfigure.

9.“AHouseDivided”Speech(1858)

Background:TheHouseDividedSpeechwasanaddressgivenbyAbrahamLincolnonJune16,1858 at the Illinois State Capitol in Springfield, after he had accepted the Illinois RepublicanParty'snominationasthatstate'sU.S.senator.LincolnbelievedthattherecentSupremeCourtdecisionon theDred Scott casewaspart of aDemocratic conspiracy thatwould lead to thelegalization of slavery in all states. After Lincoln’s speech, several of his friends expresseddismayatits“radical”content.LeonardSwett,alawyerandfriendofLincoln’s,laterwrotethatLincoln’s talk of using federal power to end slavery was “unfortunate and inappropriate,”although Swett admitted that in retrospect Lincoln was ultimately correct. At the time, thepeopleof IllinoisagreedwithSwett.Lincoln lostthecloseSenateracetothemoremoderateStephenDouglas,butLincoln’seloquentspeechearnedhimnationalattention.

ABRAHAMLINCOLN:AHOUSEDIVIDEDSPEECH,JUNE16,1858[EXCERPTS]

Mr.PRESIDENTandGentlemenoftheConvention.Wearenowfarintothefifthyear,sinceapolicywasinitiated,withtheavowedobject,and

confidentpromise,ofputtinganendtoslaveryagitation.

Undertheoperationofthatpolicy,thatagitationhasnotonly,notceased,buthasconstantly

augmented[havingbeenmadegreaterinsizeorvalue].

Inmyopinion,itwillnotcease,untilacrisisshallhavebeenreached,andpassed.

“Ahousedividedagainstitselfcannotstand.”

Ibelievethisgovernmentcannotendure,permanentlyhalfslaveandhalffree.

IdonotexpecttheUniontobedissolved---Idonotexpectthehousetofall---butIdoexpectit

willceasetobedivided.

Itwillbecomeallonething,oralltheother.

Eithertheopponentsofslavery,willarrestthefurtherspreadofit,andplaceitwherethe

publicmindshallrestinthebeliefthatitisincourseofultimateextinction;oritsadvocateswill

pushitforward,tillitshallbecomealikelawfulinalltheStates,oldaswellasnew---Northas

wellasSouth…

10.JohnBrown’sRaid(1859) (1)OnSundayevening,October16,1859, radicalabolitionist JohnBrown ledapartyof twenty-one men into the town of Harpers Ferry, Virginia, with the intention of seizing the federalarsenal there.Encounteringno resistance,Brown’smenseized thearsenal,anarmory,andarifleworks.Brownthensentoutmentorounduphostagesand liberateslaves.Brown’splansoondidnotgoasplanned.Angrytownspeopleandlocalmilitiacompaniestrappedhismeninthearmory.About twenty-fourhours later,U.S. troopscommandedbyColonelRobertE.Leearrived and stormed the engine house. Five of Brown’s party escaped, ten were killed, andseven, including Brown himself, were taken prisoner. Brown was tried in a Virginia court,although he had attacked federal property. The Virginia court found him guilty of treason,conspiracy,andmurder.Hewassentencedtodeath,andwashangedonDecember2,1859.

10.JohnBrown'sSpeech(Excerpts) (2) Background: At the end of his trial, John Brownwas permitted tomake a speech,which convincedmany northerners that hewas not an extremist butrather amartyr [someonewho is killed for theirbeliefs]forthecauseoffreedom.HisspeechappearedonabroadsideprintedinDecember1859bytheabolitionistnewspaper,theLiberator. Ihave,mayitpleasethecourt,afewwordstosay.Inthefirstplace,Idenyeverythingbutwhat Ihaveallalongadmitted -- thedesignonmyparttofreetheslaves.Iintendedcertainlytohavemadeacleanthing of thatmatter, as I did lastwinterwhen Iwent intoMissouriand there tookslaveswithout thesnappingofagunoneither side,moved themthrough thecountry,and finally left them inCanada. Idesigned tohavedone the same thingagainona larger scale. Thatwas all I intended. I never did intend murder, or treason, or thedestructionofproperty,ortoexciteorinciteslavestorebellion,ortomakeinsurrection.Ihaveanotherobjection;andthat is, it isunjustthat Ishouldsuffersuch a penalty. Had I interfered in the manner which I admit…itwould have been all right; and everyman in this courtwould havedeemeditanactworthyofrewardratherthanpunishment.Thiscourtacknowledges,as Isuppose,thevalidityofthe lawofGod. IseeabookkissedherewhichIsuppose tobe theBible,orat least theNewTestament.That teachesmethatall thingswhatsoever Iwould thatmenshoulddo tome, I shoulddoevenso to them. It teachesme, further, to"rememberthemthatareinbonds,asboundwiththem."Iendeavoredtoactuptothatinstruction.Letmesayonewordfurther.IfeelentirelysatisfiedwiththetreatmentIhavereceivedonmytrial.ConsideringallthecircumstancesithasbeenmoregenerousthanIexpected.ButIfeelnoconsciousnessofguilt.Ihavestatedthatfromthefirstwhatwasmyintentionandwhatwasnot.Ineverhadanydesignagainstthelifeofanyperson,nor any disposition to commit treason, or excite slaves to rebel, ormake any general insurrection. Ineverencouragedanymantodoso,butalwaysdiscouragedanyideaofthatkind.